Can lack of stamp duty or registration stop a Section 34 challenge?

No. Stamping/registration issues do not block a Section 34 setting aside challenge; they matter at Section 36 enforcement.

When should stamping and registration objections be raised?

At the enforcement stage under Section 36, drawing on Section 17 of the Registration Act and CPC Section 47.

What happened to the High Court and trial court orders?

They were set aside as they treated stamping/registration at the Section 34 stage, which was premature.

What other grounds were raised under Section 34?

Wrong tribunal composition, lack of notice, excess of power, absence of reasons, partiality—these are examined on their merits under Section 34.

M Anasuya Devi v. M Manik Reddy

Supreme Court of India 2003 Stamp & Registration (2003) 8 SCC 565 Arbitration 6 min read

Author: Gulzar Hashmi

Location: India

Slug: m-anasuya-devi-v-m-manik-reddy

Published: 2025-11-02

PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: Section 34; Section 36; stamp duty; registration; arbitral award; enforcement SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: Registration Act s17; CPC s47; tribunal composition; notice; impartiality

Quick Summary

This case explains a simple point: when can you object that an arbitral award is not stamped or registered? The Court said: not at the Section 34 stage (setting aside). Raise it at Section 36 (enforcement).

Bottom line: A party may challenge the award under Section 34 even if stamping/registration is lacking. Those defects matter when you try to enforce the award.

Issues

Can stamping and registration objections be taken at the Section 34 setting-aside stage?
Or must such objections wait until a Section 36 enforcement application is filed?

Rules

Section 34 (1996 Act): For setting aside an award—stamping/registration is not a bar to filing or deciding this challenge.
Section 36 (1996 Act): At enforcement, the court can consider stamping/registration, with support from Registration Act, s.17 and CPC, s.47.
Premature Objections: Treating stamping/registration at Section 34 stage is premature and improper.

Court document with stamp and registration seal indicating enforcement stage

Facts (Timeline)

Family Dispute & Agreement

Members of a joint family agreed to refer disputes to a 5-member Arbitral Tribunal.

Award with 4 Members (31.05.1998)

Despite only 4 members, an award was made; it was modified on 10.06.1998.

Section 34 Challenge

Respondent moved Section 34 before the Principal Sub Judge, Hyderabad, citing several grounds: wrong composition, no notice, excess of power, no reasons, partiality, and lack of stamp/registration.

Rejection & Appeal (2000)

Section 34 application was rejected; party appealed under Section 37(1) to the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

Timeline graphic showing arbitration, award, challenge, and appeal

Arguments

Appellants

Stamp/registration issues are for enforcement, not for Section 34.
High Court and trial court erred in considering those objections at setting-aside stage.
Section 34 focuses on validity grounds, not execution formalities.

Respondents

Award invalid due to wrong tribunal composition and lack of notice.
Arbitrators exceeded powers, were partial, and gave no reasons.
Unstamped/unregistered award is inadmissible.

Judgment

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and sent the Section 34 matter back to the High Court to decide the Section 34 grounds properly. It held that treating stamping/registration at the Section 34 stage was premature.

Result: Orders of the High Court and the Principal Sub Judge were set aside on this point; stamping/registration objections belong to Section 36 enforcement.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 34 ≠ Execution Stage: Lack of stamp duty/registration does not block a Section 34 challenge.
Section 36 & Execution Law: Stamping/registration issues arise at enforcement, aided by Registration Act s.17 and CPC s.47.
Prematurity Principle: Don’t decide execution objections at the setting-aside stage.

Why It Matters

This case clarifies procedure. Parties can contest an award’s validity under Section 34 without getting stuck on stamping/registration. Those formalities become crucial later, when enforcing the award.

Key Takeaways

Stamping/registration objections: Section 36, not Section 34.
Section 34 may proceed even if the award is unstamped/unregistered.
Use Registration Act s.17 and CPC s.47 at enforcement stage.
Section 34 grounds (composition, notice, excess of power, reasons, impartiality) must be examined independently.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “ STAMP AT 36”

STAMP — Stamping/registration matters.
AT — Apply those objections at enforcement.
36 — That is Section 36, not Section 34.

File Section 34 on valid grounds.
Reserve stamping/registration for enforcement.
Invoke s.17 (Registration Act) & s.47 (CPC) if needed.

IRAC Outline

Issue

Do stamp/registration objections arise at Section 34 or at Section 36?

Rule

Section 34 unaffected; objections are relevant at Section 36 with Reg. Act s.17 & CPC s.47.

Application

Lower courts wrongly treated stamping/registration at Section 34—premature.

Conclusion

Appeal allowed; Section 34 remitted; enforcement-stage objections preserved.

Glossary

Section 34: Provision to set aside an arbitral award on limited grounds.
Section 36: Provision dealing with enforcement of an arbitral award as a decree.
Stamp Duty & Registration: Fiscal/recording requirements that become relevant at execution/enforcement.